Comments on: Chiefs seek alliances with Native American groupshttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/
ProFootballTalk on NBCSports.comThu, 24 May 2018 20:01:58 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.com/By: peoriavikinghttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3537900
Mon, 11 Aug 2014 21:34:57 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3537900Florio couldn’t be more naive. “The Chiefs shouldn’t have to worry about changing the team’s name, since “Chiefs” isn’t and likely won’t evolve into a dictionary-defined slur”. Of course it will. People probably said the same thing about Redskins when the name was developed. If you don’t believe me, just walk up to a native American and say “hey, Chief, how do you get back to the intersate” and see what kind of look you get.
]]>By: pftcensor1https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3536907
Mon, 11 Aug 2014 15:49:39 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3536907A minority of Original Americans is offended by the Washington team name – a minority of Original Americans (albeit likely smaller) is offended by the Kansas City team name.

For some reason name change proponents wish to honor the wishes of the first group but will seemingly ignore the wishes of the second group.

I all name change proponents that if a group of people is offended by the name the name must be changed. Clearly Ms. Blackhorse and others are offended by KC’s name.

KC’s name must be changed … angry white guys like are on the wrong side of history on this issue… and must be made to recognize that their defense of an offending name paints them as inconsistent at best and bigoted at worst.

]]>By: politicallyincorrecthttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3535945
Sun, 10 Aug 2014 23:53:16 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3535945HTTR
]]>By: disturbedfredhttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3534209
Sat, 09 Aug 2014 21:13:11 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3534209So in the interest of public opinion you’re not going to tilt at the KC windmill? How big of you.
]]>By: nelly837https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3533839
Sat, 09 Aug 2014 17:36:09 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3533839The word “Oklahoma” literally means red people in native Choctaw language. If the Redskins have to change their name then shouldn’t the native Americans be just as offended by the Sooner state?
]]>By: numberoneinthehoodghttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3533149
Sat, 09 Aug 2014 07:40:40 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3533149Every time I see an article like this, I want to go to a casino. Not sure why.
]]>By: Ed Bandellhttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3533101
Sat, 09 Aug 2014 05:59:02 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3533101Wait….why shouldn’t there be a debate over the Kansas City Football team name?

After all, isn’t it the PC line that even if one person is offended by something, it is offensive?

You’ve never heard the word “Chief” used as a slur to refer to somebody that belongs to a tribe before? Just because a dictionary doesn’t define a word a certain way doesn’t mean it isn’t used that way.

Does the dictionary define “cracker” as a racial slur? I don’t think it does, but we all know it is one.

And why is it suddenly okay for the Kansas City Football team fans to wear the same exact kind of outfits that the Redskins do that are deemed inappropriate and offensive?

There certainly should be a discussion about this. Why isn’t it offensive when other entities out there use the same nickname as the Washington Redskins or other nicknames that refer to native american people? This most certainly should be a debate. Either you ban them all and every other team names in the world that offend people and end all of the “racism,” or you let them all go.

]]>By: whodatnhollywoodhttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3533033
Sat, 09 Aug 2014 04:41:36 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3533033Enough already! What’s next? My Saints having to create an alliance with the Pope? PC Police, give us a break!
]]>By: cowboysmb3dw28https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532983
Sat, 09 Aug 2014 04:06:17 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532983The Chiefs and Redskins have a lot in common. They’re both professional football teams. At least that’s what I, and most other people think of when we hear the names.
]]>By: sylvester000001https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532659
Sat, 09 Aug 2014 01:39:25 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532659“The Chiefs shouldn’t have to worry about changing the team’s name, since “Chiefs” isn’t and likely won’t evolve into a dictionary-defined slur. ”

This sentence is extremely disturbing.

It’s evidence again that this issue is about far more than racism or a team name.

Here you have a guy writing this post demonstrating he is getting out of control with the idea of power. He saw the Chiefs did what they did, so HE decided he is ok with that because HE now feels he is the decider for all of US.

That is bad. You cannot have an individual in society who gets like that. Fighting the name change is mostly about that, in addition to the more simpler concept of there’s no common sense in changing the name.

The above statement clearly demonstrates what the root here is really: HE believes HE should be the decider for US. The reason you know this is what it’s really about is the fact that the whole idea that Chief is Ok but Redskin is not is completely contradictory. So he’s engaging in selective judging. Who does that? People who feel they can, because they now believe they are the decider for us all. That’s not a good thing.

That’s why people will never stop fighting the name change. It’s not about the team name, it never has been.

]]>By: nickfoleandynomitehttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532498
Sat, 09 Aug 2014 00:27:57 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532498How come no one is upset with the name Edmonton Eskimos?
]]>By: nachofacehttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532459
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 23:55:53 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532459Chief isn’t in and of itself racist. It has been used as an ironic insult in some situations (e.g., I had a teacher in high school call me that whenever she didn’t like something I did), so it’s wise of KC to reach out to tribes to head off criticism.
]]>By: pipkinitehttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532434
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 23:39:45 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532434As a Native American, I’m glad to point out that you are ALL wrong. Go seahawks (Native American bird that doesn’t transgress upon a history filled with violence and politically motivated transgressions which oppressed human beings).
]]>By: araidersfanhttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532313
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 22:17:19 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532313I don’t really care too much about this whole political name thingy.

But for THIS particular franchise, the easy solution would be to officially change the name to chefs. After all, that’s what I’ve always known them as. 🙂

]]>By: mutohasapossehttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532244
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 21:42:08 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532244Wait, wait, wait … the crusade against the Skins is because some Native Americans find the name offensive. Some of the same people filing suit against the Skins have said the Chiefs is equally offensive.

How come a debate, “Should never happen?”

Hypocrisy at it’s finest. Makes sense from someone from Oklahoma who is throwing stones from a glass house.

]]>By: Marshawn Lunchhttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532192
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 21:14:36 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532192Stiller43, I do believe you when you say you wouldn’t walk up to a native American and call them either term. But you did say that you would go with “redskin” instead of “chief”, and that, to me, is the greater of the two evils. Peace be with you sir.
]]>By: whysomanylosershttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532161
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:54:20 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532161FSU Seminoles were smart enough in 1978 to reach out to the Seminole tribe BEFORE they introduced Chief Osceola as a symbol of their teams…

With the billions of dollars the NFL and owners have, you would think they would be smart enough to have figured this out years ago.

Redskins – offensive nearly 100% of the time
Chiefs – could be offensive depending upon the context.

]]>By: milksteak78https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532138
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:43:44 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532138No, as long as they aren’t the Redskins it isn’t racist:
Do the Redskins play at Arrowhead Stadium. Is the Redskins mascot a horse named Warpaint. But no, no reason for the Chiefs to have to change their name, because blah blah blah.
]]>By: tndiverhttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532105
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:30:12 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532105If I were Snyder, I would completely change the name to something along the lines of a cowboy (Washington Wranglers?). Then ban any team from wearing a uniform that resembles anything related to Native American culture (like what Minnesota is doing to them) and see how they respond! If anyone studies the origin of the word and the long standing use of the word, it was used to describe Native Americans and was started by Native Americans! It was used much the same way as we would describe a black man. You also have to look at intent, which is the biggest problem I have with this whole debate. There is no common sense in this as why would a team choose a mascot that ridicules another? The goal is to identify something you are proud of and want to represent. If anything, people should be up in arms about the Cleveland Indians Chief Wahoo logo, which is clearly taken from racist literature.
]]>By: dallascowboysdishingtherealhttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532091
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:26:42 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532091“It’s a far better strategy than, for example, pointing out the various high schools that still use the term “Chiefs,” declaring that the name will change at the stroke of “all caps never,” and suggesting that anyone who expresses a concern about the name is simply looking for Internet clicks.”

I hear ya, and it’s a better strategy than having sports writers make everyone who opposes a name change, feel like insensitive racists.

No, you read correctly the first time. I also understand neither is meant to be offensive and as someone who isn’t offended by either (but I’m a white guy, what do I know?), I only think the ‘skins should change their name if it is indeed a slur that many find offensive.

I don’t find the name “Chiefs” offensive for a team, but to walk up to a random native american person and call them Chief, to me, would scream douche baggery. That being said, I wouldn’t walk up to a random native american and call them either name.

]]>By: gentlebennohttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532057
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:17:49 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532057So the Redskins name has to go because folks are offended? Call Redskins a slur if you want, but the long term issue is who decides what’s offensive? Native Americans? The dictionary? My neighbor? The dry cleaning guy? If Redskins has to go because folks are offended by it, then clearly Chiefs can go because folks are offended by it. Or Braves, Indians, etc. What about the Saints? Maybe there’s a lot of folks who want religion out of football. What about the Patriots? Maybe there’s a lot of folks who want jingoism out of football. It’s all subjective. There’s no end to how silly this can all get.
]]>By: mushroommikehttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532055
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:16:44 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532055The nickname has to do with the nickname of the original owner and not any Indian heritage. Now having those Indian headbands and playing that dumb tomahawk chop song may be a different matter.
]]>By: boogerhuthttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532048
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:12:27 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532048Anything is going to offend someone. Period. You have the right to free speech, and also the right to be offended. You have the obligation to ignore it and move on. I’m offended every time some 10th generation American refers to himself as a mexican American, African American and so on. I’m offended every time I see some idiot with his pants around his knees. But so what. Move on.
]]>By: sylvester000001https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532041
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:09:37 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532041“The Chiefs shouldn’t have to worry about changing the team’s name, since “Chiefs” isn’t and likely won’t evolve into a dictionary-defined slur. ”

Wrong, it will in fact be a slur, probably next decade.

And it shouldn’t.

And this nonsense about you saying it’s different than Redskin only outs you for what you are, a guy who decided you hate Snyder so you wont stop psychotically obsessed going after him.

No one ever uses the term Chief toward one another except in a derogatory way. “Hey good job Chief, next time call a professional” etc.

You’re inconsistent here which is even more evidence your invented issue really isn’t an issue.

]]>By: socalraider909https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532035
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:08:13 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532035There is Nothing wrong with the chiefs name its the Redskin that needs to be changed
]]>By: rcalihttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532009
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:00:56 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532009“The Kansas City NFL Franchise” is being a little bit obvious with this move but few are losing their mind over the team name like they are with “The Washington NFL Franchise,” or as the game announcers were calling them last night,”The Redskins.”
]]>By: Marshawn Lunchhttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3532007
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 20:00:41 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3532007Stiller43 says:
Aug 8, 2014 3:07 PM
I really have no dog in the fight as I dont care about either team…

but I’d personally be a whole lot less likely to go up to a native american and drop a “hey, whats up chief?” than I would to drop a “hey, whats up redskin?”
—————

Seriously??? You’d rather call a Native American a “redskin” as opposed to calling him or her “chief”???!

You said you were less likely to call them a chief than a redskin. You must have mis-typed. Do you mean you are less likely to call someone a redskin to their face?

]]>By: censorshipstinkshttps://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/08/08/chiefs-seek-alliances-with-native-american-groups/#comment-3531988
Fri, 08 Aug 2014 19:55:50 +0000http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/?p=2272937#comment-3531988This is a quote from the Principal at Red Mesa High School.
Welcome to the 2013-2014 school year. I am honored to be at Red Mesa High School as their Principal. Red Mesa High School has a long tradition of students who have achieved in academics, and athletes who have excelled on the field. I want to build on that tradition. Redskin Pride will be promoted in all programs and activities this year. We will call it “Pursuing Excellence with honor”.

The school is located on the Navajo Reservation and is a public school. We have nearly 100% Navajo students.